Search for Q&As

Enquirers can use various factors to search for a Q&A:

  • These include searching by the Q&A ID; legal reference, date submitted, technical standard / guideline, or by keyword if known.
  • Searches can be extended to more than one legal act, topic, technical standard or guidelines by making multiple selections (i.e. pressing 'Ctrl' on your keyboard, and selecting the relevant ones from the drop-down lists by left mouse-click).

Disclaimer:

Q&As refer to the provisions in force on the day of their publication. The EBA does not systematically review published Q&As following the amendment of legislative acts. Users of the Q&A tool should therefore check the date of publication of the Q&A and whether the provisions referred to in the answer remain the same.

Please note that the Q&As related to the supervisory benchmarking exercises have been moved to the dedicated handbook page. You can submit Q&As on this topic here.

Final Q&As Q&As under review Rejected Q&As Archived Q&As All Q&As

List of Q&A's

Treatment of irrevocable payment commitments according to Article 103(3) BRRD

How should payment commitments pursuant to Article 103(3) BRRD (Directive 2014/59/EU) be treated in the capital requirements for credit risk?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2831
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Delta equivalent amount of cash-or-nothing digital (binary) options

Should the delta equivalent amount of cash-or-nothing digital (binary) options be limited to the maximum possible payment at expiry?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 528/2014 - RTS on non-delta risk of options in the standardised market risk approach
  • ID: 2016_2813
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Assignment of exposures to exposure class of Public Sector Entities

Can only the entities having legal forms of non-profit associations and foundations qualify as PSE-s and be assigned to exposure class of PSEs, or could PSEs also include legal forms of either public or private limited liability companies, which are either owned by or set up and sponsored by central governments, regional governments or local authorities and are under public supervision?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2811
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Clarification on "explicit guarantee arrangements"

The CRR definition of "“public sector entity" lists "has explicit guarantee arrangements" as one of the requirements, without further explaining or limiting this requirement. Does CRR require that all or the greater part of the entities liabilities feature an explicit guarantee by its owners or sponsor which the entity's creditors can call on? Or is "explicit guarantee arrangements" to be understood to also cover other explicit support arrangements like e.g. a guarantee on the entity's lendings for the benefit of the entity or a commitment by the owners/sponsors to guarantee the entity's ability to fulfil its obligations on its liabilities?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement
  • ID: 2016_2794
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

AT1 distribution and full year loss

Except what is provided under Article 141 of the CRD, is there any restriction imposed on distribution for an institution posting a full year (FY) Net Loss ? (assuming th entity in question runs with excess capital vs. regulatory requirements, so it's not under MDA restrictions)

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2687
  • Topic: Supervisory review and evaluation (SREP) and Pillar 2
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Capital requirement regard to own debt instruments.

Should institutions encounter own debt instruments in calculating own funds requirements for position risk?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2648
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Risk weight for exposures to central-government-risk PSEs with an original maturity of 3 months or less, which are denominated in foreign currency

May exposures to PSEs established in a Member State, whose level of risk in the opinion of the competent authority of the Member State in question does not differ from the level of risk of the central government, be assigned a risk weight of 20% in accordance with Article 116(3) CRR if they are denominated in foreign currency?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2646
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Relevant competent authority to determine the same risk weight treatment as the central government

Who is the relevant competent authority to determine if the same treatment of regional government exposure and central government exposure can be applied? The national supervisor, the European Commission or the ECB?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2637
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Exposure Value under the Equity method of accounting

What exposure value should be used for Large Exposure purposes in situations where there is a difference between the accounting value used for IFRS accounting purposes and the value used for FinRep regulatory purposes?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2612
  • Topic: Large exposures
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Expected outflows from derivatives

Could a designated/purpose-specific transaction structure consisting of two Total Return Swaps (“TRS”) on the same underlying basket of non-HQLA eligible equities with the same non-bank market counterparty where one physically settled TRS delivers the performance of the equity basket to the counterparty until the point in time when the bank elects to early terminate the transaction and the other cash settled TRS delivers the performance of the equity basket to the bank until maturity be treated as a net derivative inflow for the bank, within the LCR according to Article 32(5) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement
  • ID: 2016_2595
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

CRD Art. 140(4) in conjuction with CRR Art. 327 and CRR Art. 112

For the purpose of reporting as per point 3.4.3.2 of Annex 2 (Annex 2 of EC Implementing Act on Reporting) page 109 ''Own funds requirements for relevant credit exposures, trading book exposures and securitisation exposures in accordance with Article 140(4) CRD and determined in accordance with Part Three, Title II and Title IV of the CRR'' , are the referred CRR Art 112 restrictions under CRD Art 140(4) applicable also to IRB and also specifically for the purpose of point (b) Art 140(4) do the restrictions of CRR Art. 112 apply considering CRR Art. 327?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2016_2594
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Cash variation margin received in the same currency of settlement of the derivative contract

Second sub para. of Art. 429a(3) of the leverage ratio Delegated Regulation indicates that: "For the purposes of point (c) of the first subparagraph, where the derivative contract is subject to a qualifying master netting agreement, the currency of settlement means any currency of settlement specified in the derivative contract, the governing qualifying master netting agreement or the credit support annex to the qualifying master netting agreement.” As "currency of settlement" is not sufficiently specified and differs from standard market documentation terminology, we we would request to provide further explanation on the interpretation of “currency of settlement”.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/62 - DR with regard to the leverage ratio
  • ID: 2016_2570
  • Topic: Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Liquidity waiver for institutions controlled by EU parent financial holding company

Regarding the application of Article 8 (1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), can it be considered to extend the option to accept a liquidity sub-group to cases where the parent company is a EU parent financial holding company owning a single credit institution or a single investment firm, if all the conditions laid out in article 8 (1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) are met?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2016_2549
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Deductions of holdings of own funds instruments issued by financial sector entities included in the scope of consolidated supervision under art 49.2 CRR

For what specific purposes competent authorities may determine deductions of holdings of own funds instruments issued by financial sector entities included in the scope of consolidated supervision, apart from purposes mentioned in art 49.2: i.e. structural separation of banking activities and resolution planning? Should competent authorities determine deductions for all institutions in the member state or should it be more institution specific decision? In case of institution specific decision, should it be subject to joint decision, taken by the competent authorities of the home and host Member States?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_908
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Confirmation of waiver in particular situations

Is it confirmed that the waiver of the provisions in respect of deduction applies to capital instruments or subordinated loans that an entity holds or has granted temporarily for the purposes of a financial assistance operation designed to reorganize and save another entity even prior to the CRR/CRDIV regulations coming into force? Is it confirmed that the waiver of the provisions in respect of deduction for capital instruments or subordinated loans envisaged for the purposes of a financial assistance operation designed to reorganize and save the entity still applies also with reference to holdings already acquired but still necessary for the purposes of the financial assistance operation?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_875
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Interpretation of EADitotal and Mi in the standardised CVA charge.

Where there are several trades with the same counterparty but there is no regulatory netting agreement in place: Is one EADitotal and one Mi applied per counterparty within the formula? If one EADitotal and one Mi is applied per counterpart, can the Mi be calculated as the weighted average notional? (ambiguity arises because the CRR guidance referred to on maturity only references trades in a netting set for the calculation of a weighted average notional (article 162 (2) b)) If in the above case it is determined that individual trades are to be treated separately with no weighted average notional maturity calculated, is each EAD and M applied and treated as a separate counterparty within the formula?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_830
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Transfer Restrictions

With regards to transfer restrictions on liquid assets held in third countries Article 417 (b) specifically refers only to liquid assets reported under Article 416 (1)(c) only and not those reported under Articles 416 (1a), (1b) or (1d)? It would appear that transfer restriction are not considered for assets reported under 416(1)(a), (1)(b) or (1)(d). 

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_802
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Calculation of the value of exposures resulting from the settlement of debt instruments and equities processed through a delivery-versus-payment (DvP) mechanism.

1. Can it be understood that exposures arising from the settlement of debt instruments and equities, both to the client and the CCP, do not have a capital requirement under Pillar 1, which seems to be the proposed treatment under Basel II (paragraph 89). 2. As for Article 390, 6, b do the exposures mentioned in question 1 fall outside large exposure calculations, regardless of being to the client or to the CCP? 3. Since the settlement of debt instruments and equities seams to falls out of the scope CRR’s own funds requirements for exposures to CCP’s, what is the corresponding treatment (for both own funds and large exposure calculations) for collateral posted and contributions to the default fund of a CCP for such instruments? 4. Should collateral posted as required by the CCP to the General Clearing Member but deriving from transactions with their non-clearing members be considered as an exposure to the clients? If so, the treatment would be such as in questions 1 and 2 for capital and large exposures calculation purposes?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2532
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Distinction between Securitisation and Specialised Lending Exposures

How can specialised lending schemes used to finance physical assets (such as e.g. ships, aircrafts, projects or real estate) and involving direct payment obliga-tions of different seniority owed by an SPV, be distinguished from securitisations?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_786
  • Topic: Securitisation and Covered Bonds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Deposits by Financial Customers

Do deposits from Financial Customers with a remaining maturity of more than 30 days qualify for a 100% outflow rate for LCR purposes or shall they be excluded from calculation? (e.g. a 3 months unsecured deposit from an investment firm).

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement
  • ID: 2015_2529
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022